Fair Use

This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc.

I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site/blog for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Additionally, many posts in this blog contain original material and previously unreported news. Any media outlet, website or blogger that reports previously unreported news or quotes opinions obtained from this website is ethically obligated to credit me or my blog in their initial report on the subject.

Wednesday, April 07, 2010

I thought my point was clear: that the Blade has an agenda that does not represent the best interests of Republicans and conservatives (the two are NOT the same) so any endorsement they make in a primary contest is questionable.

But Dan wrote me a very angry email today, obviously misinterpreting that point. Since I didn't want any further misunderstandings, we talked over the phone. The first thing I did was remind him that no one, and especially not a candidate, should send an email written in anger. :)

Dan's interpretation was that I was trying to hurt him and his campaign with my comments. Nothing could be further from the truth. As I said in the original post, and still abide by:

I believe Steingraber is a solid fiscal conservative, a good businessman and I'm glad to have him as a choice on my own Republican ballot.

Dan believes the endorsement can be a good thing for his campaign. As I wrote yesterday:

There may be a way for Steingraber to turn the Blade endorsement into a positive. This morning on the radio he expressed hope that it might help his name recognition.

As I explained, the endorsement could increase name recognition, but there is no way to know if that is in a positive or negative way. I don't know of anyone who would recommend that Dan use the endorsement in his mailings to Republicans as they, based upon their history with the paper's philosophy, would be as likely to do the exact opposite of whatever the editorial board recommended.

But Dan is hopeful that he can use the endorsement in a positive way to help his campaign. That is certainly the approach he should take and I hope he will be successful, but it's an uphill battle and he should be prepared for that.

Dan also thought I was saying he could not win in November if he wins the primary. He thought I was trying to discourage people from supporting him because of this fact. Here's what I said:

So I have to ask myself: if Steingraber were to win the nomination, would he be able to beat Krompak, especially in light of the fact that Steinngraber's support from The Blade will certainly evaporate as they promote their chosen one?

Sadly for Dan, I believe the answer is no - but not for lack of effort on his part. Krompak will have The Blade, unions, and the infrastructure of the Democratic Party. The Republican candidate will have ... well, whatever they, themselves, bring to the table personally.

What I should have said was that, right now, I don't think any of the three Republicans in the primary can win against Krompak - for the same reasons. Krompak will have The Blade, unions and the infrastructure of the Democratic Party and the Republican candidate will have ... well, whatever they, themselves, bring to the table personally.

In order to actually win this race, the Republican will have to raise and spend a significant amount of money in advertisements, direct mail, radio and TV. That's what the Democrat will do and to be competitive, the Republican will have to match and/or exceed those efforts. Raising that type of money is always difficult for Republicans, and even more so in this economy.

The state party will look at the demographics, at the previous votes and polling and won't step in with cash unless the race is so highly competitive that their influx will actually result in securing the win. Of course, that's if they have any money left over after supporting the state-wide candidates.

So I apologize to Dan for singling him out and not elaborating that my opinion on that issue would apply equally to the other two Republican candidates as well.

Dan believes he's the best candidate. And rightly he should. His primary opponents also believe that of themselves. No one should run for office if they don't believe they are the best choice.

A Blade endorsement is always a double-edged sword. If Dan can turn that endorsement to his advantage, all the more power to him.

1 comment:

If you hold the Blade endorsement at arms length for perspective, what you see is an endorsement now and in November for Ben Krompak. Think of it as a few Republican trees in the Lucas County Democratic forest. That's why it's important to not get bogged down in details.

So let's examine the Blade's choice. If one stood outside the Blade building, you would have seen the "white smoke" proclaiming a new Pope...er County Commissioner had been chosen. The ballots with the Republican names?...."just pitch in the dumpster." But I digress.

Back to the article. The Republican candidate seems to be an afterthought for appearance purposes. Why? Two thirds of the article is spent with the showering of glowing terms and a smiling picture of the Democrat. The Republican gets an obligatory one third and fuzzy dour photo.

Why is this important to us? Does he not remind you of someone else that the Blade dearly loves? Haven't we just seen this movie? As a matter of fact, it's still playing to reduced audiences in Lucas County. "Bueller? Bueller?"

Still not quite sure I'm right? Try this. My understanding of Ben Krompak is that he is a nice fellow. Married, smart He has spent his many short years as an adult working as a political operative...whom among all the candidates from both sides, he has the least amount of real world experience. Isn't that just what we need right now? The Blade thinks so. So of course you should too.

So look, I don't know about you fellow contributors, but it appears to me that the Blade loved the first version so much, they want to see, and want the rest of us to see "Ben, the Sequel." "Bueller?, Bueller?"